Thanks for this. I found it a helpful explanation of quite a complex issue. However, where does the opposition to Catholic Emancipation come in? This act (1774?) was remarkable in the context of UK politics though only the beginning of a long process, but was one of the complaints made to the UK Government.
Just an old hippy here tired of the "christian" debate. Our constitution plainly states no establishment of religion. period. We are free as a people to worship in any way we see fit, or not worship at all. Our founders were familiar with church as state. Many of our first colonies were governed this way. One of my earliest ancestors in this country was forced out of Salem village because he refused to follow a church order. His son was in the first graduating class of Harvard when it was a divinity school. As minister in Salem he was tasked with enforcing court rulings. Do you think the Salem witch trials would have taken place if the government then in place was secular? Our founders compromised on many things in our constitution but there is a reason the first sentence in the first amendment excludes religion from government. We are meant to be governed by reason not faith.
Modern Christians tend to cherry-pick from the entirety of the Bible. This passage from The West Wing resounds:
‘I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleaned the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?
My Chief of Staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?
Here's one that's really important ‘cause we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. (Leviticus 11:7) If they promise to wear gloves can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?
Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother, John, for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?’
Great post on a timely subject. I think the ultimate proof of the Founders’ and Framers’ intent is that they rejected the prevailing practices of the time. The Framers made a conscious choice to separate church and state. For example, they omitted Christian litmus tests for holding public office that were common in the constitutions of the original 13 colonies.
As for your future post on Speaker Mike Johnson, I hope you touch on his ties to the Creation Museum and the Answers in Genesis organization. These organizations have some, let’s just say interesting views.
This is a great article. Like Ms Chapman commented, I really appreciate the clear and sequential way in which you described the religious beliefs of our forefathers. Thank you.
Thanks for this. I found it a helpful explanation of quite a complex issue. However, where does the opposition to Catholic Emancipation come in? This act (1774?) was remarkable in the context of UK politics though only the beginning of a long process, but was one of the complaints made to the UK Government.
Just an old hippy here tired of the "christian" debate. Our constitution plainly states no establishment of religion. period. We are free as a people to worship in any way we see fit, or not worship at all. Our founders were familiar with church as state. Many of our first colonies were governed this way. One of my earliest ancestors in this country was forced out of Salem village because he refused to follow a church order. His son was in the first graduating class of Harvard when it was a divinity school. As minister in Salem he was tasked with enforcing court rulings. Do you think the Salem witch trials would have taken place if the government then in place was secular? Our founders compromised on many things in our constitution but there is a reason the first sentence in the first amendment excludes religion from government. We are meant to be governed by reason not faith.
Modern Christians tend to cherry-pick from the entirety of the Bible. This passage from The West Wing resounds:
‘I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleaned the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?
My Chief of Staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?
Here's one that's really important ‘cause we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. (Leviticus 11:7) If they promise to wear gloves can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?
Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother, John, for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?’
Great post on a timely subject. I think the ultimate proof of the Founders’ and Framers’ intent is that they rejected the prevailing practices of the time. The Framers made a conscious choice to separate church and state. For example, they omitted Christian litmus tests for holding public office that were common in the constitutions of the original 13 colonies.
As for your future post on Speaker Mike Johnson, I hope you touch on his ties to the Creation Museum and the Answers in Genesis organization. These organizations have some, let’s just say interesting views.
This is a great article. Like Ms Chapman commented, I really appreciate the clear and sequential way in which you described the religious beliefs of our forefathers. Thank you.